learner satisfaction equality and diversity data report

Learner Satisfaction Equality and Diversity Data Report, 2011 to 2012 Executive summary

Introduction

1. The Learner Satisfaction Survey Version 4 took place from November 2011 to May 2012. The survey was open to all in-scope1 learners and 365,514 learners submitted a valid response. 94.6% of survey responses were submitted online and the remainder on paper questionnaires.

2. The Learner Satisfaction survey has 9 questions and learners are asked to rate various aspects of their course, learning programme or

training programme on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 equals very bad and 10 equals very good. This report analyses responses to the nine scoring questions of the 2011/12 Learner Satisfaction survey and includes breakdowns by age, gender, ethnicity, learning difficulties and or disabilities, level of deprivation and level of study. For each of the different learner groups, the report compares the average (mean) scores for the nine questions and the percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or higher.

1 A definition of in-scope learners can be found in the Further Education Public Information 2011 to 2012 Learner Satisfaction Technical Report August 2012

Participation in the Learner Satisfaction Survey

3. 16- to18-year-olds were over-represented in the sample of responses. 55.2% of the sample population was within the 16- to18- year-old age band compared to 35.8% of the overall learner population. All other age bands were under-represented in the sample, particularly those within the range 25 and over. With each increasing age band, learners were increasingly under represented within the sample of learners taking part in the survey. Females were slightly under-represented in the sample compared to the overall population and males were slightly over-represented.

4. In terms of ethnic groups, white learners were slightly over-represented in the sample of responses compared to the overall population. All

other ethnic groups were under-represented. Learners with a declared learning difficulty or disability were over-represented in the sample. 18.0% of the sample population had learning difficulties and or disabilities compared to 14.4% of the overall learner population.

5. Learners who lived in areas of high deprivation were less likely to complete the survey than learners who lived in areas of lower

deprivation. There was a clear correlation between survey participation and deprivation band with higher levels of deprivation being associated with lower survey participation rates.

Summary Chart: Survey Participation Rate by Deprivation

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012, Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012, Indices of Deprivation 2010

Indices of Deprivation 2010 Respondents Population Response Rate

1 (Most Deprived) 51,283 307,016 16.7%2 46,115 272,847 16.9%3 42,964 239,361 17.9%4 38,946 210,200 18.5%5 36,070 188,624 19.1%6 33,642 169,320 19.9%7 31,115 153,817 20.2%8 29,303 145,280 20.2%9 27,791 136,822 20.3%

10 (Least Deprived) 23,542 116,325 20.2%

3

Findings from the Learner Satisfaction Survey

6. The summary chart below shows the average (mean) score for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by age band, gender, ethnicity and learning difficulties and or disabilities. The breakdown by age band produced the greatest variation in scores.

Summary Chart: Average (mean) Learner Satisfaction Score by Equality and Diversity Categories

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012, Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00 8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00

16-18

19-24

25-34

35-44

45-59

60+

Female

Male

Asian / Asian British

Black / African / Caribbean / Black British

Mixed / Multiple ethnic group

White

Other ethnic group

Declared with a LDD

Not Declared with a LDD

No Information

Age

Gro

upG

ende

rEt

hnic

Gro

upLL

DD

Mean score

4

Age band

7. For all 9 questions, there was a pattern of increasing average scores with age band, from the lowest within the 16-18 age band and the highest within the 60 plus age band. The percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or above also demonstrated the same age band related pattern. Over half the learners aged 35 and over gave a maximum score of 10, compared to less than a quarter of 16- to18-year-olds.

8. The average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) increased with age band from a low of 7.94 for

those aged 16-18 to a high of 9.07 for those aged 60 and over. The percentage of learners who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 increased with age band from a low of 66.5% for those aged 16-18 to a high of 88.8% for those aged 60 and over.

9. For learners aged 16-18 there was a pattern of decreasing average (mean) scores with higher levels of study. The pattern was similar but

less well defined for learners aged 19 and over.

Gender

10. For all 9 questions, females gave higher average scores than males. The percentage of females who gave a score of 8, 9 or 10 (where 0 equals very bad and 10 equals very good) was also higher for all questions.

11. Females and males gave the highest rating to Q4 (How good or bad is the respect staff show you?). Females gave the lowest rating to Q5

(How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what to do after the course?) and males gave the lowest rating to Q8 (How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners?)

12. The average (mean) score for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) was higher for females, as was the percentage

giving a score of 8, 9 or 10. 36.2% of females gave a maximum score of 10 compared to 30.0% of males.

Ethnicity

13. For all 9 questions the average (mean) scores were highest for Asian/Asian British learners and lowest for Mixed/Multiple ethnic group learners. Average (mean) scores given by Black/Black British learners were lower than those given by White learners for 7 of the 9 questions.

14. All ethnic groups gave the highest rating to Q5 (How good or bad is the respect staff show you?) White learners and those belonging to

other ethnic groups gave the lowest rating to Q5 (How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what to do after the course?)

5

However, Asian/Asian British learners, Black/Black British learners and those belonging to Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups gave the lowest rating to Q8 (How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners?).

15. For Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) Asian/Asian British learners gave the highest average (mean) score (8.36)

and Mixed/ Multiple ethnic group learners the lowest (8.07). There was a small difference between Black/Black British and White learners with Black/Black British learners having a slightly lower average mean score.

16. The percentage who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 was highest among Asian/Asian British learners and lowest among Mixed/Multiple

ethnic group learners.

17. For White learners there was a clear correlation between average (mean) scores and levels of deprivation with higher levels of deprivation being associated with higher average (mean) scores and lower deprivation associated with lower average (mean) scores. However, the pattern for the other ethnic groups was less well defined. Average (mean) scores were more erratic and there was no clear correlation between average (mean) scores and deprivation.

18. Average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) were higher for females across all ethnic groups.

The greatest difference was among Asian/Asian British learners where the average (mean) for females was 8.52 and the average (mean) for males was 8.17 (difference = 0.35).

Learners with Learning Difficulties and or Disabilities and or health problems

19. The average (mean) scores for learners with learning difficulties and or disabilities were very similar to other learners and showed only a slight variation for most questions. The largest variation in scores was for Q6.( How good or bad is the support you get on this course?), where learners with learning difficulties and or disabilities (learners withLDD) scored more highly than other learners meaning they were more satisfied.

20. The average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) was the same for learners who have learning

difficulties and or disabilities and those who do not (average score 8.30). However, the percentage who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 was slightly lower for learners with LDD compared to other learners (72.8% compared to 73.7%).

6

Disability

21. The average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) varied depending on the type of disability. Learners with profound complex disabilities gave the highest average (mean) score (8.94).Those with Asperger’s Syndrome and emotional/behavioural difficulties gave the lowest scores (8.12 and 8.13 respectively).

22. The percentage of learners who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 also varied depending on the type of disability. Learners with profound

complex disabilities had the highest percentage (84.2%) and those with Asperger’s Syndrome and emotional/behavioural difficulties the lowest (69.4% and 69.7% respectively). The number of respondents with profound complex disabilities was relatively small (175 from a population of 945), but this was sufficient to be within tolerance for the Learner Satisfaction Survey confidence interval quality test and therefore the results can be regarded as sufficiently robust.

Learning difficulty

23. Average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) varied depending on the type of learning difficulty. Learners with severe learning disabilities gave the highest average (mean) score (8.92) and those with Dyslexia (8.06) the lowest.

24. There were also differences in the percentage of learners who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 depending on the type of learning

difficulty. Learners with severe learning disabilities had the highest percentage (84.8%) and those with Dyslexia (68.3%) the lowest.

7

Contents Executive summary 1 Contents 9 Introduction 8 Notes on data 9 Analysis of participation in the survey 9

Age band 9 Gender 11 Ethnicity 12 Learning Difficulty and/or Disability 13 Deprivation 14

Analysis of satisfaction scores 16 Age band 16 Gender 22 Ethnicity 26 Learning Difficulties and or Disabilities 32 Breakdown by disability 38 Breakdown by learning difficulty 41 Age and gender 44 Age and ethnicity 47 Age and Learning Difficulties and or Disabilities 51 Sex and ethnicity 55 Sex and deprivation 58 Ethnicity and deprivation 62 Age, sex and level of study 65

Appendix: base populations 68

8

Introduction

25. This report presents the results of the Learner Satisfaction Survey 2011 to 2012 and analyses the data by age group, gender, ethnicity, learning difficulties and/or disabilities and level of deprivation. In order to carry out this analysis, survey respondents were matched to their learning record on the ILR from which individuals’ learner characteristics could be established.The Learner Satisfaction Survey 2011 to 2012 took place from November 2011 to May 2012. The survey was open to all in-scope2 learners and 365,514 learners submitted a valid response.

26. The learner satisfaction score analysed in this report is derived from a questionnaire that captures learners’ perceptions about their

course, learning programme or training programme on a rating scale of 0 to 10 where 0 equals very bad and 10 equals very good. There are 9 scoring questions covering the following aspects of the respondent’s experience of their learning and learning provider:

• information given at the start of the learning programme. • help staff gave in the first few weeks. • how good the teaching was. • respect staff show to the learner. • advice learners have been given about what they can do after they have finished their learning programme. • support they got whilst learning. • their view of how good the organisation is at listening to the views of learners and then acting on those views; and • how good their organisation is overall

27. The overall average (mean) scores for the 9 questions are compared for different learner groups along with the percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or higher.

28. The report also analyses the breakdown of learner characteristics of those who took part in the survey (referred to as ‘respondents’)

against the characteristics of the in-scope learner population as a whole (referred to as ’population”’) in order to generate participation rates for different learner groups. In-scope learners are those who were on programmes funded by the Skills Funding Agency (excluding Offenders’ Learning and Skills Service provision) between 14 November 2011 and 25 May 2012.

2 A definition for in-scope learners can be found in the Further Education Public Information 2011/12 Learner Satisfaction Technical Report August 2012same comment re a hyperlink

9

Notes on Data

29. Survey data has been taken from the Learner Satisfaction Survey Version 4, 2011 to 2012 and includes only responses which have been matched to the national Individualised Learner Record (ILR) 2011 to 2012.

30. Tables with bases with less than 5 respondents have been suppressed and indicated with ‘<5’.

31. Age, gender, learning difficulties and or disabilities and ethnicity are based upon self-declaration by the learner as recorded on the ILR.

32. Deprivation has been calculated using the Indices of Deprivation 2010, linking the deprivation score within a super output area to the

home postcode of the learner. Deprivation bands are based on the national rank of super output area by indices of deprivation (2010). There are 32,482 super output areas in the country ranked from 1 (most deprived) to 32,482 (least deprived). Band 1 includes the most deprived 10% super output areas in the country (1-3,248).

33. Tables in the analysis of participation rates and also in the Appendix include confidence intervals. The confidence interval is calculated

from the respondent and population numbers and is included as a measure of robustness. Confidence intervals between 0 and 3% can be regarded as very robust. Those between 3% and 5% (highlighted in amber) are less robust but still within tolerance for the Learner Satisfaction survey. Confidence intervals above 5% (highlighted in red) reflect relatively low respondent numbers and therefore should be viewed with some caution.

34. A description of the learner satisfaction survey and the methodology for calculating provider scores can be found in the learner satisfaction

technical report3.

Analysis of Participation in the Survey

Age Band 35. Table 1A and Chart 1A show that 16- to 18-year-olds were over-represented in the sample. 55.2% of the sample population was within the

16-18 year old age band compared to 35.8% of the overall learner population. All other age bands were under-represented in the sample, particularly those within the range 25 and over. A further breakdown of participation rates by age band and gender is included in the Appendix.

3 Further Education Public Information 2011/12 Learner Satisfaction Technical Report August 2012

10

Number % of Total Number % of Total

16-18 201,839 55.2% 703,920 35.8% 0.2%19-24 61,131 16.7% 379,215 19.3% 0.4%25-34 40,378 11.0% 329,922 16.8% 0.5%35-44 31,656 8.7% 261,607 13.3% 0.5%45-59 25,686 7.0% 233,663 11.9% 0.6%60+ 4,824 1.3% 58,917 3.0% 1.4%

Confidence Interval

Age BandRespondents Population

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

60+

45-59

35-44

25-34

19-24

16-18

Population % of Total Respondents % of Total

Table 1A and Chart 1A: participation by age band

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

11

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

Male

Female



Female 193,415 52.9% 1,062,807 54.0% 0.2%Male 172,099 47.1% 904,437 46.0% 0.2%

Confidence Interval

SexRespondents Population

Sex

36. Females were slightly under-represented in the sample compared to the overall population and males were slightly over-represented. A further breakdown of participation rates by age band, gender and level of study is included in the Appendix.

Table 2A and Chart 2A: Participation by Sex


12

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

White

Other ethnic group


Black / African / Caribbean / Black British




Asian / Asian British 28,089 7.7% 163,796 8.3% 0.5%Black / African / Caribbean / Black British 19,818 5.4% 131,403 6.7% 0.6%

Mixed / Multiple ethnic group 9,255 2.5% 53,349 2.7% 0.9%Other ethnic group 10,614 2.9% 70,983 3.6% 0.9%

White 297,738 81.5% 1,547,713 78.7% 0.2%

Confidence Interval

EthnicityRespondents Population

Ethnicity

37. Table 3A shows the survey participation breakdown by ethnicity compared to the overall learner population. Further breakdowns of participation rates by age band and ethnicity and by sex and ethnicity are included in the Appendix. The table shows that the sample is a good representation of the overall population.

Table 3A and Chart 3A: Participation by Ethnicity


13

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

No Information


Declared with a LDD



Declared with a LDD 65,750 18.0% 283,983 14.4% 0.3%Not Declared with a LDD 289,306 79.2% 1,611,969 81.9% 0.2%

No Information 10,458 2.9% 71,292 3.6% 0.9%

Confidence Interval

LLDDRespondents Population

Learning Difficulties and/or Disabilities

38. Table 4A shows the survey participation breakdown by learning difficulties and/or disabilities compared to the overall learner population. A further breakdown of participation rates by learning difficulties and/or disabilities and age band is included in the Appendix. Learners with a declared learning difficulty or disability were over-represented in the sample. 18.0% of the sample population had a Learning Difficulty or Disability (LDD) compared to 14.4% of the overall learner population.

Table 4A and Chart 4A: Participation by Learning Difficulty/Disability


14

Deprivation

39. Table 5A shows the survey participation breakdown by deprivation level compared to the overall learner population. Tables showing participation rates by deprivation further broken down by sex and deprivation are included in the Appendix. The majority of learners within the learner population fall into the lower 5 deprivation bands. However, there was a clear correlation between survey participation and deprivation band with lower levels of deprivation being associated with higher participation rates.

Table 5A: Participation by Deprivation

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012, Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012; Indices of Deprivation 2010


1 (Most Deprived) 51,283 14.2% 307,016 15.8% 0.4%2 46,115 12.8% 272,847 14.1% 0.4%3 42,964 11.9% 239,361 12.3% 0.4%4 38,946 10.8% 210,200 10.8% 0.4%5 36,070 10.0% 188,624 9.7% 0.5%6 33,642 9.3% 169,320 8.7% 0.5%7 31,115 8.6% 153,817 7.9% 0.5%8 29,303 8.1% 145,280 7.5% 0.5%9 27,791 7.7% 136,822 7.1% 0.5%

10 (Least Deprived) 23,542 6.5% 116,325 6.0% 0.6%

Confidence Interval

Indices of Deprivation 2010Respondents Population

15

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0%

10 (Least Deprived)

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 (Most Deprived)


. Chart 5A: participation by deprivation band

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012, Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012; Indices of Deprivation 2010

16

Analysis of Satisfaction Scores Age Band

40. Tables 6A and 6B, below, show average (mean) scores and the percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or above for each of the 9 scoring questions broken down by age band. For all 9 questions, there was a pattern of increasing average scores with age band, from the lowest within the 16-18 age band and the highest within the 60 plus age band. The percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or above also demonstrated the same age band related pattern.

Table 6A: Average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by age band and question


Mean Scores 16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

Base 201,839 61,131 40,378 31,656 25,686 4,824

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 7.81 8.22 8.43 8.47 8.48 8.68

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 8.11 8.48 8.69 8.77 8.81 9.09

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 8.08 8.57 8.92 9.00 9.01 9.26

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 8.30 8.91 9.24 9.31 9.38 9.55

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 7.54 8.03 8.31 8.41 8.43 8.62

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 8.09 8.60 8.92 9.01 9.08 9.31

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 7.62 8.32 8.72 8.82 8.90 8.96

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 7.45 8.12 8.56 8.66 8.72 8.73

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 7.94 8.47 8.80 8.92 8.96 9.07

17

41. The percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or above also demonstrated the same age band related pattern.

Table 6B: percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above by age band and question

Source: Learner Satisfaction Version 4; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more 16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

Base 201,839 61,131 40,378 31,656 25,686 4,824

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 63.3% 71.7% 75.4% 76.4% 77.2% 80.3%

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 69.7% 77.1% 81.2% 82.7% 83.6% 88.7%

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 69.2% 78.9% 85.1% 86.8% 87.1% 91.9%

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 73.9% 85.0% 90.6% 92.1% 93.2% 95.7%

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 58.4% 68.5% 74.0% 76.0% 76.9% 80.1%

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 69.5% 79.6% 85.3% 87.2% 88.1% 92.4%

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 60.1% 74.4% 81.8% 83.9% 85.1% 86.6%

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 56.1% 70.4% 78.8% 80.9% 81.7% 82.8%

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 66.5% 76.8% 83.5% 85.6% 86.4% 88.8%

18

42. Chart 6A illustrates the pattern of increasing average scores by age band. Learners of all ages tended to give the highest rating to Q4 (How good or bad is the respect staff show you?) and the lowest rating to Q5 (How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what to do after the course?)

Chart 6A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by age band and question


43. Table 6C shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by age band. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also included. Over half the learners aged 35 and over gave a maximum score of 10 compared to less than a quarter of 16- to18-year-olds.

5.00

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

8.00

8.50

9.00

9.50

10.00

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

19

Summary Table 6C: breakdown of responses by age band for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


44. The average (mean) scores for Q9 also increased with age band from a low of 7.94 for those aged 16-18 to a high of 9.07 for those aged 60 and over as Chart 6B illustrates.

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

201,839 61,131 40,378 31,656 25,686 4,824

0 0.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0%

1 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1%

2 0.7% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%

3 1.2% 0.9% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4%

4 1.9% 1.3% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6%

5 6.2% 4.3% 2.9% 2.5% 2.3% 2.0%

6 7.3% 4.7% 3.3% 2.7% 2.6% 2.3%

7 15.2% 10.7% 8.4% 7.4% 7.0% 5.7%

8 22.2% 17.8% 15.6% 14.9% 14.9% 14.1%

9 20.8% 20.5% 21.0% 20.3% 19.5% 19.9%

10 23.5% 38.5% 46.7% 50.2% 51.7% 54.5%

N/A or No Responses 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3%

7.94 8.47 8.80 8.92 8.96 9.07

66.5% 76.8% 83.5% 85.6% 86.4% 88.8%

Unweighted Score

% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more

Response Scale

Question 9

Age Band

Number of Responses

20

Summary chart 6B: age band by Q9 – average (Mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


45. The percentage of learners who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 increased with age band from a low of 66.5% for those aged 16-18 to a

high of 88.8% for those aged 60 and over, as Chart 6C illustrates.

7.94

8.478.80 8.92 8.96 9.07

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

21

Summary Chart 6C: Age band by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Sex

46. Tables 7A and 7B below show the average (mean) scores and the percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or above for each of the 9 scoring questions broken down by gender. For all questions, females gave higher average scores than males. The percentage of females who gave a score of 8, 9 or 10 was also higher for all questions.

66.5%

76.8%

83.5%85.6% 86.4%

88.8%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

% o

f Res

pond

ents

22

% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more Female Male

Base 193,415 172,099

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 68.9% 67.7%

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 74.7% 74.4%

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 76.8% 74.4%

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 81.8% 79.7%

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 65.2% 63.9%

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 77.5% 74.4%

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 70.7% 66.8%

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 67.1% 62.7%

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 75.1% 71.4%

Table 7A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by sex and question


Table 7B: percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above by gender and question

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012 and Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

47. Chart 7A illustrates the average scores for each question broken down by age and gender. Females and males gave the highest rating to

Q4 (How good or bad is the respect staff show you?). Females gave the lowest rating to Q5 (How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what to do after the course?) and males gave the lowest rating to Q8 (How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners?).

Mean Scores Female Male

Base 193,415 172,099

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 8.10 8.01

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 8.38 8.33

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 8.49 8.33

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 8.75 8.61

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 7.88 7.80

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 8.51 8.34

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 8.17 7.94

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 7.99 7.76

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 8.40 8.18

23

Chart 7A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by gender and question


48. Table 7C shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is? broken down by sex. The average (mean) score was higher for females as was the percentage giving a score of 8, 9 or 10. 36.2% of females gave a maximum score of 10 compared to 30.0% of males. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are illustrated in Charts 7B and 7C.

5.00

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

8.00

8.50

9.00

9.50

10.00


Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfac

tion

Scor

e

Female Male

24

Summary Table 7C: breakdown of responses by gender for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Female Male

193,415 172,099

0 0.3% 0.6%

1 0.2% 0.3%

2 0.5% 0.6%

3 0.9% 1.0%

4 1.4% 1.6%

5 4.7% 5.1%

6 5.4% 5.9%

7 11.4% 13.3%

8 18.3% 20.8%

9 20.7% 20.6%

10 36.2% 30.0%

N/A or No Responses 0.1% 0.1%

8.40 8.18

75.1% 71.4%% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more

Response Scale

Sex

Number of Responses

Unweighted Score

Question 9

25

8.408.18

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Female Male

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Summary Chart 7B: Q9 by gender – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

Source: for Chart 7B and 7C Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

26

75.1%71.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Female Male

% o

f Res

pond

ents

Summary Chart 7C: Q9 by gender– percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

27

Mean ScoresAsian / Asian British

Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

British

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

White

Base 28,089 19,818 9,255 10,614 297,738

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 8.10 8.09 7.82 7.99 8.06

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 8.31 8.20 8.12 8.30 8.38

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 8.49 8.42 8.24 8.48 8.41

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 8.72 8.60 8.47 8.72 8.69

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 8.00 7.96 7.62 7.87 7.83

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 8.49 8.37 8.22 8.41 8.44

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 8.12 7.96 7.77 8.07 8.07

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 8.01 7.83 7.60 7.93 7.88

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 8.36 8.25 8.07 8.30 8.30

Ethnicity

49. Tables 8A and 8B below show average (mean) scores and percentages of learners giving a score of 8 or above, for each of the 9 scoring questions broken down by ethnicity. For all questions the average (mean) scores were highest for Asian/Asian British learners and lowest for Mixed/Multiple ethnic group learners. Average (mean) scores given by Black/Black British learners were lower than those given by White learners for 7 of the 9 questions.

Table 8A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by ethnicity and question


28

% of Respondents Scoring 8 or moreAsian / Asian British

Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

British

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

White

Base 28,089 19,818 9,255 10,614 297,738

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 68.8% 67.8% 62.9% 66.5% 68.6%

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 73.4% 70.5% 69.0% 73.1% 75.2%

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 76.8% 74.7% 71.9% 76.4% 75.7%

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 81.5% 78.3% 76.6% 81.4% 81.0%

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 68.3% 67.2% 59.9% 65.2% 64.2%

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 77.1% 74.5% 71.3% 75.0% 76.2%

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 70.4% 66.2% 63.1% 68.8% 69.1%

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 68.0% 63.8% 58.9% 65.9% 64.9%

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 74.1% 71.8% 68.4% 73.0% 73.6%

Table 8B: percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above by ethnicity and question


50. Chart 8A illustrates the average scores for each question broken down by ethnicity. All ethnic groups gave the highest rating to Q5 (How

good or bad is the respect staff show you?). White learners and those belonging to other ethnic groups gave the lowest rating to Q5 (How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what to do after the course?). Asian/Asian British, Black/Black British and those belonging to Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups gave the lowest rating to Q8 (How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners?).

29

Chart 8A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by ethnicity and question


51. Table 8C shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is? broken down by ethnicity. The average (mean) score was highest for Asian/Asian British learners as was the percentage giving a score of 8, 9 or 10.

5.00

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

8.00

8.50

9.00

9.50

10.00


Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Asian / Asian British Black / African / Caribbean / Black British

Mixed / Multiple ethnic group Other ethnic group

White

30

Summary Table 8C: breakdown of responses by ethnicity for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


52. Asian/Asian British learners gave the highest average (mean) score (8.36) and Mixed/Multiple ethnic group learners the lowest (8.07). There was a small difference between Black/Black British and White learners with Black/Black British learners having a slightly lower average (mean).


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black British

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

White

28,089 19,818 9,255 10,614 297,738

0 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.4%1 0.3% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3%2 0.5% 0.6% 0.5% 0.6% 0.5%3 0.9% 1.1% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0%4 1.5% 1.9% 2.0% 1.5% 1.5%5 5.2% 5.8% 6.2% 5.1% 4.7%6 5.3% 5.9% 6.9% 5.6% 5.6%7 11.6% 11.7% 13.9% 12.2% 12.4%8 17.5% 17.2% 20.2% 18.8% 19.8%9 20.2% 18.6% 19.7% 19.6% 20.9%

10 36.4% 36.0% 28.5% 34.6% 32.9%N/A or No Responses 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1%

8.36 8.25 8.07 8.30 8.3074.1% 71.8% 68.4% 73.0% 73.6%

Question 9

Ethnicity

Number of Responses

Unweighted Score% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more

Response Scale

31

Summary Chart 8B: ethnicity by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


53. The percentage who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 was highest among Asian/Asian British learners and lowest among Mixed/Multiple

ethnic group learners. Chart 8C shows a stronger positive response from White learners compared to Black/Black British learners which was less evident from the average (mean) scores.

8.36 8.25 8.078.30 8.30

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Asian / Asian British Black / African /Caribbean / Black British

Mixed / Multiple ethnicgroup

Other ethnic group White

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfac

tion

Scor

e

32

Summary Chart 8C: ethnicity by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Learners with Learning Difficulties and or Disabilities

54. Tables 9A and 9B below show average (mean) scores and the percentage of learners giving a score of 8 or above for each of the 9 scoring questions broken down by declared/not declared learning difficulties and/or disabilities.

74.1%71.8%

68.4%73.0% 73.6%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%



Other ethnic group White

% o

f Res

pond

ents

33

Mean ScoresDeclared

with a LLD

Not Declared

with a LDD

No Information

Base 65,750 289,306 10,458

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 8.07 8.06 7.90

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 8.38 8.35 8.23

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 8.44 8.41 8.37

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 8.66 8.70 8.59

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 7.87 7.84 7.74

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 8.49 8.42 8.32

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 8.02 8.08 7.89

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 7.86 7.89 7.72

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 8.30 8.30 8.17

Table 9A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by LDD and question


34

Table 9B: percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above by LDD and question

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012 ; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

55. The average (mean) scores for those with learning difficulties and/or disabilities were very similar to those without learning difficulties

and/or disabilities and show only a slight variation for most questions. The largest variation in scores was for Q6. (How good or bad is the support you get on this course?) with those with learning difficulties and or disabilities scoring higher.

% of Respondents Scoring 8 or moreDeclared

with a LDD

Not Declared

with a LDD

No Information

Base 65,750 289,306 10,458

Q1. How good or bad was the information you were given when you were choosing your course? 67.9% 68.6% 64.6%

Q2. How good or bad was the help staff gave you in the first few weeks? 74.4% 74.7% 71.3%

Q3. How good or bad is the teaching on your course? 75.9% 75.7% 74.5%

Q4. How good or bad is the respect staff show to you? 79.8% 81.1% 78.7%

Q5. How good or bad is the advice you have been given about what you can do after this course? 65.0% 64.6% 62.5%

Q6. How good or bad is the support you get on this course? 76.8% 76.0% 73.5%

Q7. How good or bad are the college staff at listening to the views of learners? 68.0% 69.2% 65.0%

Q8. How good or bad is the college at acting on the views of learners? 64.6% 65.2% 61.2%

Q9. Overall, how good or bad do you think the college is? 72.7% 73.6% 70.6%

35

5.00

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

8.00

8.50

9.00

9.50

10.00


Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Declared with a LDD Not Declared with a LDD No Information

Chart 9A: average (mean) learner satisfaction scores by LDD and question


56. Table 9C shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by declared/not declared with learning difficulties and/or disabilities.

36

Summary Table 9C: breakdown of responses by LDD for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


57. The average (mean) scores for Q9 show no variation at all between learners who are declared LDD and those who are not.

Declared with a LDD


No Information

65,750 289,306 10,458

0 0.5% 0.4% 0.5%1 0.3% 0.3% 0.2%2 0.5% 0.5% 0.6%3 1.1% 0.9% 1.1%4 1.7% 1.4% 1.6%5 5.6% 4.7% 5.4%6 5.8% 5.6% 6.1%7 11.6% 12.4% 13.7%8 17.5% 19.9% 20.7%9 19.3% 21.0% 20.0%

10 36.0% 32.8% 30.0%N/A or No Responses 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

8.30 8.30 8.1772.7% 73.6% 70.6%

Question 9

LLDD

Number of Responses


Response Scale

37

Summary Chart 9B: LLDD by Q 9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


58. The percentage who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 was slightly lower for declared LDD learners.

8.30 8.30 8.17

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0


Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfac

tion

Scor

e

38

Summary Chart 9C: LDD by Q 9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Breakdown by Disability

59. Table 10A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by disability. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also included.

72.7% 73.6%70.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


% o

f Res

pond

ents

39

Summary Table 10A: breakdown of responses by disability for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


60. The average (mean) scores for Q9 varied depending on the type of disability. Learners with profound complex disabilities gave the highest average (mean) score (8.94) and those with Asperger’s Syndrome (8.12) and emotional/behavioural difficulties (8.13) the lowest. The number of respondents with profound complex disabilities was relatively small (175) but sufficient to be within tolerance for the learner satisfaction survey and therefore the results can be regarded as relatively robust.

Visual Impairment

Hearing Impairment

Disability Affecting Mobility

Other Physical

Disability

Other Medical

Condition (for example

epilepsy,

Emotional/Behavioural Difficulties

Mental health

difficulty

Temporary Disability

After Illness (for example post-viral) or

Profound Complex

Disabilities

Aspergers Syndrome

Multiple Disabilities

Other

Not Known/Information Not

Provided

2,175 2,460 1,909 1,385 10,502 2,998 2,228 181 175 1,814 2,198 7,463 30,788

0 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.6% 0.4% 0.5%

1 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% 0.6% 0.0% 0.5% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4%

2 0.7% 0.3% 0.5% 0.6% 0.5% 0.8% 0.3% 0.6% 1.2% 0.7% 0.3% 0.4% 0.6%

3 0.4% 1.0% 0.8% 1.0% 0.9% 1.7% 1.0% 1.1% 0.6% 1.1% 0.6% 1.0% 1.2%

4 1.0% 1.5% 1.2% 1.2% 1.6% 1.9% 1.3% 0.6% 1.2% 1.8% 1.3% 1.7% 1.9%

5 5.3% 5.2% 4.7% 5.1% 4.9% 6.8% 4.6% 8.0% 3.5% 6.7% 4.6% 5.8% 5.8%

6 5.8% 4.4% 4.3% 4.6% 5.9% 6.2% 4.8% 2.8% 1.8% 5.5% 4.1% 5.8% 6.2%

7 10.7% 11.0% 9.4% 11.0% 11.8% 11.9% 9.5% 14.8% 7.6% 13.9% 8.2% 11.8% 12.1%

8 15.9% 16.5% 12.6% 15.4% 19.3% 18.3% 16.0% 17.6% 10.5% 19.1% 14.4% 16.7% 17.8%

9 20.6% 18.7% 18.1% 19.2% 20.0% 16.1% 18.9% 17.0% 17.0% 19.5% 17.7% 18.7% 19.7%

10 38.7% 40.5% 47.3% 41.1% 34.3% 35.2% 42.7% 36.9% 56.7% 30.7% 46.8% 37.2% 33.8%

N/A or No Responses 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 1.0% 0.1% 0.1%

8.44 8.46 8.63 8.47 8.31 8.13 8.53 8.31 8.94 8.12 8.65 8.32 8.22

75.3% 75.8% 78.2% 75.8% 73.7% 69.7% 77.7% 71.6% 84.2% 69.4% 79.7% 72.7% 71.4%

Question 9

Disability

Number of Responses

Unweighted Score


Response Scale

40

8.44 8.46 8.63 8.47 8.31 8.138.53 8.31

8.948.12

8.65 8.32 8.22

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Mea

n Lea

rner

Satis

fact

ion

Scor

e

Summary chart 10A: disability by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


61. The percentage of learners who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 varied depending on the type of disability. Learners with profound complex disabilities had the highest percentage (84.2%) and those with Asperger’s Syndrome (69.4%) and emotional/behavioural difficulties (69.7%) the lowest.

41

75.3% 75.8% 78.2% 75.8% 73.7%69.7%

77.7%71.6%

84.2%

69.4%

79.7%72.7% 71.4%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

% of

Res

pond

ents

Summary Chart 10B: disability by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Breakdown by Learning Difficulty

62. Table 11A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by learning difficulty. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown.

63.

42

Summary Table 11A: breakdown of responses by disability for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


64. The average (mean) scores for Q9 varied depending on the type of learning difficulty. Learners with severe learning difficulties gave the highest average (mean) score (8.92) and those with Dyslexia (8.06) the lowest.

Moderate Learning Difficulty

Severe Learning Difficulty

Dyslexia DyscalculiaOther Specific

Learning Difficulty

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Multiple Learning

DifficultiesOther

Not Known/Informat

ion Not Provided

12,018 1,139 17,599 525 1,972 2,137 1,799 7,841 20,720

0 0.4% 0.2% 0.6% 0.4% 0.7% 0.7% 0.2% 0.5% 0.4%1 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.8% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3%2 0.5% 0.3% 0.6% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5%3 0.9% 0.8% 1.3% 0.8% 1.4% 1.0% 0.8% 1.2% 1.0%4 1.5% 1.1% 1.9% 2.9% 1.8% 2.1% 2.1% 1.7% 1.6%5 4.8% 4.2% 6.6% 5.5% 5.0% 6.0% 6.2% 5.8% 5.1%6 4.5% 2.4% 7.0% 5.7% 6.5% 5.6% 6.2% 5.8% 5.6%7 8.4% 5.7% 13.2% 11.8% 13.3% 12.2% 9.9% 13.1% 11.9%8 13.5% 12.6% 18.8% 22.5% 18.7% 16.2% 13.8% 18.2% 18.8%9 17.9% 14.5% 19.9% 17.5% 18.5% 17.7% 16.7% 19.5% 20.3%

10 47.1% 57.4% 29.5% 31.8% 33.3% 37.7% 42.4% 33.3% 34.4%N/A or No Responses 0.1% 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 1.1% 0.1% 0.1%

8.61 8.92 8.06 8.15 8.19 8.28 8.42 8.22 8.3178.7% 84.8% 68.3% 71.8% 70.5% 71.7% 73.6% 71.1% 73.6%

Question 9

Disability

Number of Responses


Response Scale

43

Summary Chart 11A: learning difficulty by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


65. The percentage of learners who gave a score of 8 or above for Q9 varied depending on the type of learning difficulty. Learners with severe learning difficulties had the highest percentage (84.8%) and those with Dyslexia (68.3%) the lowest.

8.618.92

8.06 8.15 8.19 8.28 8.42 8.22 8.31

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Mea

n Lea

rner

Satis

fact

ion

Scor

e

44

78.7%84.8%

68.3%71.8% 70.5% 71.7% 73.6% 71.1% 73.6%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

% o

f Res

pond

ents

Summary Chart 11B: learning difficulty by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 2012; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

Age and gender

66. Table 12A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by age band and gender. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown.

45

Summary table 12A: breakdown of responses by age band and gender for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012 ;Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012

*Figures suppressed due to low numbers in accordance with data protection procedures

67. Among learners aged under 35, average (mean) scores for females were higher than those for males, with the greatest difference within the 19-24 age band. Males within the 35-44 and 45-59 age bands gave slightly higher average (mean) scores than females but among those aged 60 and over, males gave a slightly lower average (mean) score than females.

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male94,066 107,773 31,911 29,220 26,219 14,159 21,840 9,816 16,659 9,027 2,720 2,104

0 0.4% 0.7% 0.2% 0.5% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%1 0.3% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% * *2 0.6% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% * 0.2%3 1.2% 1.2% 0.9% 1.0% 0.5% 0.6% 0.4% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3%4 2.0% 1.9% 1.2% 1.5% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.5% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5%5 6.3% 6.1% 4.1% 4.5% 3.0% 2.7% 2.6% 2.3% 2.5% 2.0% 1.9% 2.1%6 7.4% 7.3% 4.5% 5.0% 3.4% 3.2% 2.8% 2.4% 2.7% 2.5% 2.6% 1.9%7 14.7% 15.7% 9.8% 11.8% 8.3% 8.4% 7.6% 7.1% 7.2% 6.5% 5.4% 6.0%8 21.3% 23.0% 16.3% 19.4% 15.1% 16.5% 15.0% 14.8% 14.8% 15.0% 13.3% 15.0%9 21.4% 20.4% 20.3% 20.6% 20.7% 21.7% 20.0% 21.0% 18.9% 20.7% 19.1% 20.9%10 24.4% 22.6% 41.9% 34.8% 47.5% 45.1% 50.2% 50.3% 51.9% 51.4% 56.0% 52.7%

N/A or No Responses 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2%

7.99 7.90 8.57 8.35 8.82 8.78 8.91 8.94 8.94 8.99 9.09 9.0567.2% 65.9% 78.5% 74.8% 83.3% 83.3% 85.1% 86.1% 85.6% 87.1% 88.4% 88.6%

60+16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59


Response Scale

Question 9

Number of Responses

46

Summary chart 12A: age band and gender by Q9 average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


68. For learners aged under 25, the percentage of females giving a score of 8, 9 or 10 was higher than that of males, particularly among those aged 19-24. A slightly higher proportion of males than females in each of the age bands above 25 gave scores of 8 or above.

7.99

8.578.82 8.91 8.94 9.09

7.908.35

8.78 8.94 8.99 9.05

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

Mea

n Lea

rner

Satis

facti

on Sc

ore

Female Male

47

Summary chart 12B: age band and gender by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Age and ethnicity

69. Table 13A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by age band and ethnicity. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown.

67.2%

78.5%

83.3%85.1% 85.6%

88.4%

65.9%

74.8%

83.3%86.1% 87.1% 88.6%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

% of

Res

pond

ents

Female Male

48

Summary table 13A (part 1): breakdown of responses by age band and ethnicity for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012 & Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012


70. The base numbers of responses within the 60+ age group are comparatively low and therefore less robust. The number of responses within the age 60+ Mixed/Multiple ethnic group is too low to produce reliable results.


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

WhiteAsian / Asian British

Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

White

4,100 3,368 673 1,636 21,879 2,079 1,985 360 894 20,368 238 159 29 147 4,251

0 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% * 0.2% * * 0.3% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1 0.2% * * * 0.2% * * * 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *

2 0.2% * 0.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% * 0.6% * 0.2% 0.0% * 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%

3 0.3% 0.4% * 0.7% 0.5% * 0.3% * 0.7% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% * * 0.4%

4 0.9% 0.8% * 0.9% 0.6% 0.5% 0.8% * 1.0% 0.7% * * 0.0% * 0.5%

5 2.2% 2.5% 2.5% 3.5% 2.5% 2.2% 2.8% * 3.9% 2.2% 2.9% * 0.0% 6.8% 1.8%

6 2.5% 2.8% 4.0% 4.4% 2.5% 2.6% 2.6% 2.5% 3.0% 2.6% * * 0.0% 3.4% 2.4%

7 7.2% 7.2% 7.4% 8.8% 7.4% 7.2% 6.9% 6.7% 7.7% 6.9% 5.9% 3.1% * 3.4% 5.9%

8 14.2% 13.5% 16.5% 17.3% 15.0% 14.7% 14.5% 14.4% 15.3% 14.9% 10.9% 10.7% * 14.3% 14.4%

9 20.6% 20.6% 21.8% 19.1% 20.2% 20.5% 19.7% 20.3% 19.2% 19.4% 23.5% 20.8% * 16.3% 19.8%

10 51.1% 51.8% 46.8% 44.2% 50.4% 51.1% 51.4% 50.6% 48.3% 52.0% 54.6% 59.1% 75.9% 53.1% 54.3%

N/A or No Responses 0.3% * 0.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.6% * * 0.3% * * 0.0% 0.0% 0.3%

8.95 8.96 8.88 8.68 8.92 8.97 8.94 8.92 8.81 8.97 9.14 9.20 9.45 8.80 9.07

86.0% 85.8% 85.1% 80.6% 85.6% 86.3% 85.6% 85.3% 82.9% 86.3% 89.1% 90.6% 93.1% 83.7% 88.5%

45-59 60+35-44Question 9

Number of Responses

Unweighted Score


Response Scale

49

Summary table 13A (part 2): breakdown of responses by age band and ethnicity for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)



71. There was some variation in average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) within each age band according to ethnic group. Within most age bands, Asian/Asian British and White learners tended to give higher average (mean) scores than other ethnic groups. Among those aged under 25, Black/Black British learners were the least positive whereas among those aged over 25, it was those belonging to other ethnic groups who gave the lowest scores.


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

White

12,356 7,564 5,512 4,429 171,978 4,656 3,239 1,607 1,608 50,021 4,660 3,503 1,074 1,900 29,241

0 0.8% 1.0% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% * * 0.2%

1 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% * 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% * 0.4% 0.2%

2 0.8% 1.1% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.8% 0.7% 0.9% 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% * 0.5% 0.3%

3 1.4% 1.9% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% 0.9% 1.4% 1.4% 1.1% 0.9% 0.5% 0.5% * 0.4% 0.6%

4 2.1% 3.1% 2.5% 2.1% 1.9% 1.6% 1.8% 1.9% 1.8% 1.2% 0.5% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7%

5 7.7% 9.5% 7.6% 6.5% 5.9% 5.2% 6.0% 5.5% 5.1% 4.1% 2.9% 2.9% 3.6% 3.8% 2.8%

6 7.6% 9.0% 8.5% 7.2% 7.2% 5.1% 6.5% 5.9% 5.7% 4.5% 3.2% 3.7% 3.4% 4.2% 3.2%

7 15.3% 16.5% 16.9% 16.6% 15.0% 11.5% 12.3% 12.2% 10.8% 10.5% 7.9% 8.5% 8.4% 8.8% 8.4%

8 20.3% 20.8% 22.5% 21.1% 22.4% 17.5% 17.1% 18.7% 18.6% 17.8% 14.3% 15.0% 15.7% 16.9% 15.8%

9 19.4% 16.0% 19.7% 19.7% 21.2% 20.3% 19.8% 18.6% 18.4% 20.6% 21.2% 20.3% 20.0% 21.1% 21.1%

10 24.1% 20.3% 19.3% 23.5% 23.7% 36.6% 33.3% 34.3% 36.6% 39.2% 48.6% 47.3% 46.8% 42.6% 46.5%

N/A or No Responses * * 0.0% * 0.0% * 0.2% * * 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% * * 0.2%

7.84 7.52 7.73 7.89 7.98 8.37 8.18 8.23 8.30 8.51 8.87 8.79 8.79 8.65 8.81

63.8% 57.2% 61.5% 64.4% 67.3% 74.4% 70.2% 71.7% 73.6% 77.6% 84.1% 82.6% 82.6% 80.6% 83.4%

Question 916-18 19-24 25-34

Number of Responses

Unweighted Score


Response Scale

50

Summary chart 13A: age band and ethnicity by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


72. Within most age bands, Asian/Asian British and White learners tended to have the highest percentage giving a score of 8 or above. For those age under 35, Black/Black British learners were the least likely to give a score of 8 or above and White learners the most likely. For age groups over 25, those belonging to other ethnic groups had the lowest percentage giving a score of 8 or above.

7.8

8.4

8.9 9.0 9.09.1

7.5

8.2

8.89.0 8.9

9.2

7.7

8.2

8.8 8.9 8.9

9.5

7.9

8.38.7 8.7 8.8 8.8

8.0

8.58.8 8.9 9.0 9.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

Asian / Asian British Black / African / Caribbean / Black British Mixed / Multiple ethnic group Other ethnic group White

51

Summary chart 13B: age band and ethnicity by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Age and Learning Difficulties and/or Disabilities

73. Table 14A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by age band and LDD. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown.

64%

74%

84%86% 86%

89%

57%

70%

83%86% 86%

91%

61%

72%

83%85% 85%

93%

64%

74%

81% 81%83% 84%

67%

78%

83%86% 86%

89%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

% of

Res

pond

ents


52

Summary table 14A (part 1): breakdown of responses by age band and LLDD for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012 *Figures suppressed due to low numbers in accordance with data protection procedures

Declared with a LDD


No Information

Declared with a LDD


No Information

Declared with a LDD


No Information

40,755 155,666 5,418 11,271 48,578 1,282 4,801 34,096 1,481

0 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% *

1 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% * 0.4% 0.2% 0.4%

2 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 1.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.5%

3 1.2% 1.2% 1.4% 1.1% 0.9% 1.3% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5%

4 2.1% 1.9% 1.9% 1.5% 1.3% 1.6% 1.0% 0.7% 1.5%

5 6.5% 6.1% 6.9% 5.4% 4.1% 5.1% 3.7% 2.7% 3.2%

6 7.1% 7.4% 7.8% 4.9% 4.7% 6.4% 3.1% 3.3% 4.2%

7 13.7% 15.5% 16.9% 9.9% 10.9% 12.9% 8.0% 8.4% 9.7%

8 19.8% 22.8% 23.8% 14.9% 18.4% 18.8% 13.1% 15.9% 17.2%

9 20.3% 21.0% 20.6% 17.9% 21.1% 18.1% 18.2% 21.4% 21.1%

10 27.6% 22.5% 19.4% 43.0% 37.6% 33.5% 50.9% 46.3% 41.5%

N/A or No Responses 0.0% 0.0% * 0.2% 0.1% * 0.4% 0.2% 0.2%

8.02 7.93 7.82 8.48 8.47 8.18 8.81 8.81 8.61

67.7% 66.3% 63.8% 75.8% 77.1% 70.4% 82.2% 83.6% 79.7%

16-18 19-24 25-34Question 9

Number of Responses

Unweighted Score


Response Scale

53

Summary table 14A (part 2): breakdown of responses by age band and LLDD for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


74. Average (mean) scores were higher among learners with learning difficulties and or disabilities within most age bands, the exception being the 25-34 age group where the average (mean) score for declared LDD learners was equal to the average (mean) for those who do not have learning difficulties and or disabilities.

Declared with a LDD


No Information

Declared with a LDD


No Information

Declared with a LDD


No Information

3,720 26,687 1,249 4,176 20,710 800 1,027 3,569 228

0 0.3% 0.2% * * 0.1% * 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1 0.2% 0.2% * * 0.1% * 0.0% * 0.0%

2 0.3% 0.2% * 0.2% 0.2% 0.6% * * *

3 0.3% 0.4% 0.8% 0.5% 0.4% 0.6% * 0.4% 0.0%

4 0.9% 0.6% 1.0% 0.7% 0.6% 2.0% * 0.7% 0.0%

5 2.8% 2.4% 3.5% 2.4% 2.3% 3.6% 1.8% 1.9% 4.8%

6 2.7% 2.7% 2.9% 2.2% 2.7% 3.5% 2.1% 2.3% 3.9%

7 7.0% 7.4% 9.5% 6.0% 7.0% 9.9% 4.5% 6.1% 5.7%

8 12.9% 15.1% 16.3% 12.5% 15.3% 16.6% 10.8% 14.8% 17.1%

9 17.8% 20.6% 19.9% 16.5% 20.2% 18.4% 18.0% 20.8% 14.5%

10 54.6% 49.8% 45.2% 58.3% 50.7% 44.0% 61.1% 52.7% 53.5%

N/A or No Responses 0.2% 0.3% * 0.5% 0.4% * 0.8% 0.2% 0.0%

8.96 8.92 8.71 9.08 8.95 8.60 9.22 9.04 8.91

85.3% 85.6% 81.4% 87.2% 86.2% 79.0% 89.9% 88.3% 85.1%

60+


Question 9

Number of Responses

Response Scale

Unweighted Score

35-44 45-59

54

Summary chart 14A: age band and LDD by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


75. The percentage giving a score of 8 or above for Q9 showed a slightly different pattern to the average (mean) score breakdowns. The percentages for learners without learning difficulties and/or disabilities in the 19-24 and 25-34 age bands were higher than those for learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities.

8.02

8.488.81 8.96 9.08 9.22

7.93

8.478.81 8.92 8.95 9.04

7.828.18

8.61 8.71 8.608.91

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfac

tion

Scor

e


55

Summary chart 14B: age band and LDD by Q9 – Percentage of Respondents Scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Sex and ethnicity 76. Table 15A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think

the provider is?) broken down by gender and ethnicity. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown.

68%

76%

82%85% 87%

90%

66%

77%

84%86% 86%

88%

64%

70%

80% 81%79%

85%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

16-18 19-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+

% of

Res

pond

ents


56

Summary table 15A: breakdown of responses by gender and ethnicity for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


77. Average (mean) scores for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) were higher for females across all ethnic groups. The greatest difference was among Asian/Asian British learners where the average (mean) for females was 8.52 and the average (mean) for males was 8.17 (difference = 0.35).


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

British

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group


Black / African /

Caribbean / Black

British

Mixed / Multiple

ethnic group

Other ethnic group

White

15,158 11,406 4,845 5,906 156,100 12,931 8,412 4,410 4,708 141,638

0 0.2% 0.4% 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.6%

1 0.2% 0.5% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.6% 0.3%

2 0.4% 0.6% 0.5% 0.6% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6%

3 0.7% 1.1% 1.0% 0.7% 0.9% 1.1% 1.2% 1.2% 1.3% 1.0%

4 1.3% 1.8% 2.1% 1.3% 1.4% 1.7% 1.9% 2.0% 1.8% 1.5%

5 4.8% 5.5% 6.1% 4.7% 4.5% 5.8% 6.3% 6.3% 5.7% 4.9%

6 4.7% 5.4% 6.9% 5.0% 5.4% 5.9% 6.7% 6.8% 6.4% 5.9%

7 10.6% 10.6% 13.0% 10.9% 11.5% 12.8% 13.3% 15.0% 13.8% 13.3%

8 16.7% 15.9% 19.0% 18.7% 18.5% 18.4% 19.0% 21.6% 18.9% 21.2%

9 20.3% 19.1% 19.7% 20.3% 20.9% 20.0% 17.8% 19.8% 18.6% 20.9%

10 40.0% 38.9% 30.8% 37.1% 35.7% 32.3% 32.0% 25.9% 31.4% 29.7%

N/A or No Responses 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% * 0.2% 0.1%

8.52 8.36 8.14 8.44 8.40 8.17 8.11 8.00 8.11 8.19

77.0% 73.9% 69.5% 76.2% 75.2% 70.7% 68.9% 67.3% 69.0% 71.8%

Female MaleQuestion 9

Responses


UnWeighted Score

Response Scale

57

Summary chart 15A: ethnicity and gender by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


78. As with average (mean) scores, the percentage who gave a score of 8 or above was higher for females across all ethnic groups.

8.528.17

8.368.118.14 8.00

8.448.11

8.408.19

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Female Male

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore


58

Summary chart 15B: ethnicity and gender by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Sex and deprivation

79. Table 16A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?) broken down by gender and deprivation. The deprivation levels run from 1 to 10 where 1 is the most deprived and 10 is the least deprived. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown.

77.0%

70.7%73.9%

68.9%69.5%67.3%

76.2%

69.0%

75.2%71.8%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Female Male

% of

Res

pond

ents


59

Summary Table 16A: breakdown of responses by gender and deprivation for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

60

Summary table 16B: breakdown of responses by gender and deprivation for Q9

(Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012; Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012; Indices of Deprivation 2010

80. There was a clear correlation between average (mean) scores and levels of deprivation. Higher deprivation levels were associated with higher average (mean) scores and lower deprivation levels associated with lower average (mean) scores. Average (mean) scores were also higher for females across all deprivation bands.

1 (Most Deprived)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 (Least

Deprived)

27,623 24,901 23,250 20,860 19,166 17,578 16,177 15,103 14,121 12,118

0 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3%

1 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3%

2 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5%

3 0.8% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9%

4 1.2% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.4% 1.5% 1.6% 1.4% 1.7% 1.7%

5 4.3% 4.7% 4.9% 4.6% 4.8% 4.6% 4.8% 4.5% 4.8% 4.7%

6 4.6% 4.8% 5.2% 5.4% 5.5% 5.7% 5.9% 5.7% 6.2% 5.9%

7 9.8% 10.6% 11.1% 10.9% 11.8% 11.8% 12.0% 12.8% 12.5% 13.3%

8 16.3% 17.2% 17.5% 17.9% 18.3% 18.8% 19.2% 20.2% 19.5% 20.5%

9 20.5% 20.4% 20.5% 20.7% 21.1% 20.9% 20.6% 20.5% 21.5% 20.8%

10 41.4% 38.9% 37.5% 37.0% 35.1% 34.6% 33.7% 32.7% 31.8% 30.9%

N/A or No Responses 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2%

8.57 8.48 8.43 8.42 8.37 8.35 8.31 8.31 8.27 8.24

78.3% 76.6% 75.6% 75.6% 74.5% 74.3% 73.6% 73.4% 72.8% 72.2%% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more

UnWeighted Score

Question 9

Responses

Response Scale

Female

61

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

1 (MostDeprived)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (LeastDeprived)

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfac

tion

Scor

e

Deprivation Band: Indices of Deprivation 2010

Female Male

Summary chart 16A: gender and deprivation by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


81. As with average (mean) scores, there is a clear correlation between the percentage giving a score of 8 or above and levels of deprivation with higher percentages being associated with higher levels of deprivation and lower percentages being associated with lower levels of deprivation. Percentages were also higher for females across all deprivation bands.

62

Summary chart 16B: gender and deprivation by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Ethnicity and deprivation 82. Table 17A shows the average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above to Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you

think the provider is?) broken down by ethnicity and deprivation band.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 (Most Deprived)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (Least Deprived)

% o

f Res

pond

ents


Female Male

63

Summary table 17A: breakdown of responses by ethnicity and deprivation for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


83. For White learners there was a clear correlation between average (mean) scores and levels of deprivation with higher levels of deprivation being associated with higher average (mean) scores and lower deprivation associated with lower average (mean) scores. However, the pattern for the other ethnic groups is less well defined. Average (mean) scores are more erratic and there is no clear correlation between average (mean) scores and deprivation bands.

1 (Most Deprived)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 (Least

Deprived)Base 7,048 5,061 4,263 3,327 2,458 1,877 1,228 1,009 836 688

Mean Score 8.37 8.36 8.40 8.39 8.31 8.34 8.35 8.22 8.37 8.22

% of Respondents Scoring 8 or more 74.1% 74.6% 75.7% 74.2% 72.7% 74.1% 73.4% 72.1% 72.0% 71.2%

Base 5,744 4,725 3,391 2,082 1,347 869 489 392 289 209

Mean Score 8.37 8.23 8.22 8.23 8.09 8.16 8.05 8.28 8.13 8.12


Base 1,759 1,637 1,307 1,046 821 674 572 462 451 394

Mean Score 8.21 8.12 7.97 8.05 8.09 7.99 7.85 8.03 8.13 8.02


Base 2,013 1,772 1,537 1,196 996 802 631 523 485 431

Mean Score 8.43 8.28 8.25 8.26 8.34 8.36 8.14 8.24 8.21 8.22


Base 34,719 32,920 32,466 31,295 30,448 29,420 28,195 26,917 25,730 21,820

Mean Score 8.48 8.42 8.38 8.33 8.28 8.24 8.22 8.20 8.17 8.13


Question 9

Deprivation Band by Ethnicity


Black / African / Caribbean / Black

British


Other ethnic group

White

64

Summary chart 17A: ethnicity and deprivation by Q9 – average (mean) score (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


84. For White learners there is a clear correlation between the percentages of learners giving scores of 8 and above and deprivation band with higher levels of deprivation being associated with higher percentages. However, this pattern is not apparent for any of the other ethnic groups.

5.00

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

8.00

8.50

9.00

9.50

10.00

1 (Most Deprived)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (Least Deprived)

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfac

tion

Scor

e




White

65

Summary chart 17B: ethnicity and deprivation by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Age, gender and level of study 85. Table 18A shows the percentage of learners who gave each score on the scale of 0 to 10 for Q9 Overall, how good or bad do you think

the provider is? broken down by age, gender and level of study. The overall average (mean) scores and percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above are also shown. For 16 -18 learners there was a pattern of decreasing average (mean) scores with higher levels of study. This pattern was true for male and female learners. The pattern was similar but less well defined for learners aged 19+.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 (Most Deprived)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (Least Deprived)

% o

f Res

pond

ents




White

66

Summary table 18A: breakdown of responses by age band/gender/level for Q9 (Overall, how good or bad do you think the provider is?)


Entry Level Level 1 Level 2 Level 3+ Entry Level Level 1 Level 2 Level 3+ Entry Level Level 1 Level 2 Level 3+ Entry Level Level 1 Level 2 Level 3+

2,674 9,526 29,927 51,939 4,428 17,970 34,802 50,573 14,443 11,867 37,575 35,464 8,693 6,625 26,383 22,625

0 0.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.5%

1 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3%

2 0.3% 0.5% 0.5% 0.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.8% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5%

3 1.1% 1.1% 1.0% 1.3% 1.0% 1.1% 1.2% 1.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.9% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 1.1%

4 1.6% 1.6% 1.7% 2.2% 1.9% 1.7% 1.6% 2.2% 0.6% 0.7% 0.7% 1.2% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 1.4%

5 5.0% 5.4% 5.6% 6.9% 5.5% 5.9% 5.9% 6.4% 2.6% 2.9% 2.6% 4.1% 3.0% 2.9% 2.6% 4.5%

6 5.1% 6.0% 6.4% 8.3% 4.9% 6.4% 6.5% 8.3% 2.6% 3.3% 3.0% 4.4% 2.6% 3.3% 3.0% 5.2%

7 7.9% 11.5% 12.5% 16.8% 9.8% 13.7% 14.2% 17.9% 6.5% 7.8% 7.6% 10.0% 5.9% 9.3% 7.7% 12.8%

8 12.7% 18.7% 19.9% 23.0% 14.7% 21.5% 22.7% 24.4% 12.0% 15.2% 15.1% 17.0% 12.6% 17.0% 16.1% 20.5%

9 18.5% 22.3% 22.5% 20.8% 18.2% 21.3% 21.7% 19.3% 17.4% 19.7% 21.0% 20.3% 17.0% 19.9% 22.2% 21.3%

10 46.7% 32.1% 29.2% 19.2% 42.3% 26.7% 24.4% 18.2% 57.2% 49.4% 48.6% 41.1% 56.6% 45.5% 46.0% 31.7%

N/A or No Responses * 0.1% 0.0% * * 0.0% 0.0% * 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3% 0.1%

8.57 8.27 8.20 7.79 8.42 8.06 8.01 7.72 9.06 8.88 8.88 8.55 9.01 8.76 8.82 8.27

77.9% 73.1% 71.6% 63.0% 75.1% 69.5% 68.8% 61.9% 86.5% 84.2% 84.8% 78.3% 86.2% 82.4% 84.3% 73.5%

Question16-18 19+

Female Male Female Male

Number of Responses

Response Scale


Unweighted Score

67

. Summary chart 18A: age band/gender/level by Q9 – average (mean) score



86. For learners aged 16-18 there was a general trend of falling percentages of learners giving scores of 8 and above as level of study increases although there was very little difference between level 1 and level 2.

87. For learners aged 19 and over the trend is less well defined with learners at level 2 having higher percentages of males and females

giving scores of 8 and above than learners at level 1.

8.578.27 8.20

7.79

8.428.06 8.01

7.72

9.06 8.88 8.888.55

9.018.76 8.82

8.27

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Entry Level

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3+

Entry Level


Entry Level


Entry Level



16-18 19+

Mea

n Le

arne

r Sat

isfa

ctio

n Sc

ore

68

Summary chart 18B: age band/gender/level by Q9 – percentage of respondents scoring 8 or above



Appendix: base populations

88. The following table gives the base numbers for the sample sizes (number of respondents) and population sizes (total number of learners) on which the tables and charts in this report are based.

Base Populations: Overall


78%73% 72%

63%

75%69% 69%

62%

87% 84% 85%

78%

86%82% 84%

74%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Entry Level


Entry Level


Entry Level


Entry Level



16-18 19+

% of

Res

pond

ents


Overall 365,514 100.0% 1,967,244 100.0% 0.1%

Respondents PopulationConfidence

IntervalGroup

69

Base populations: gender and age band



16-18 94,066 25.7% 326,935 16.6% 0.3%19-24 31,911 8.7% 195,524 9.9% 0.5%25-34 26,219 7.2% 196,908 10.0% 0.6%35-44 21,840 6.0% 164,726 8.4% 0.6%45-59 16,659 4.6% 142,320 7.2% 0.7%60+ 2,720 0.7% 36,394 1.8% 1.8%

16-18 107,773 29.5% 376,985 19.2% 0.3%19-24 29,220 8.0% 183,691 9.3% 0.5%25-34 14,159 3.9% 133,014 6.8% 0.8%35-44 9,816 2.7% 96,881 4.9% 0.9%45-59 9,027 2.5% 91,343 4.6% 1.0%60+ 2,104 0.6% 22,523 1.1% 2.0%

PopulationSex Age Band

Respondents

Female

Male

Confidence Interval

70

Base populations: age band and ethnicity





White 171,978 47.1% 585,187 29.7% 0.2%Asian / Asian British 4,656 1.3% 28,321 1.4% 1.3%

Black / African / Caribbean / Black British 3,239 0.9% 22,249 1.1% 1.6%Mixed / Multiple ethnic group 1,607 0.4% 11,171 0.6% 2.3%

Other ethnic group 1,608 0.4% 10,921 0.6% 2.3%White 50,021 13.7% 306,553 15.6% 0.4%




Black / African / Caribbean / Black British 3,368 0.9% 27,678 1.4% 1.6%Mixed / Multiple ethnic group 673 0.2% 5,937 0.3% 3.6%



Mixed / Multiple ethnic group 360 0.1% 3,734 0.2% 4.9%Other ethnic group 894 0.2% 9,754 0.5% 3.1%

White 20,368 5.6% 183,855 9.3% 0.6%Asian / Asian British 238 0.1% 2,447 0.1% 6.0%

Black / African / Caribbean / Black British 159 0.0% 1,623 0.1% 7.4%Mixed / Multiple ethnic group 29 0.0% 413 0.0% 17.6%

Other ethnic group 147 0.0% 2,457 0.1% 7.8%White 4,251 1.2% 51,977 2.6% 1.4%

Confidence Interval

35-44

16-18

19-24

25-34

Age Band EthnicityRespondents Population

45-59

60+

71

Base populations: Age Band and LLDD



Declared with a LDD 40,755 11.2% 128,114 6.5% 0.4%Not Declared with a LDD 155,666 42.6% 554,937 28.2% 0.2%

No Information 5,418 1.5% 20,869 1.1% 1.1%Declared with a LDD 11,271 3.1% 53,630 2.7% 0.8%

Not Declared with a LDD 48,578 13.3% 314,822 16.0% 0.4%No Information 1,282 0.4% 10,763 0.5% 2.6%


No Information 1,481 0.4% 13,773 0.7% 2.4%Declared with a LDD 3,720 1.0% 26,786 1.4% 1.5%

Not Declared with a LDD 26,687 7.3% 223,375 11.4% 0.6%No Information 1,249 0.3% 11,446 0.6% 2.6%


No Information 800 0.2% 9,686 0.5% 3.3%Declared with a LDD 1,027 0.3% 11,270 0.6% 2.9%

Not Declared with a LDD 3,569 1.0% 42,892 2.2% 1.6%No Information 228 0.1% 4,755 0.2% 6.3%

Age Band LLDDRespondents Confidence

Interval

Population

16-18

19-24

25-34

35-44

45-59

60+

72

Base populations: gender and ethnicity






Black / African / Caribbean / Black British 8,412 2.3% 55,561 2.8% 1.0%Mixed / Multiple ethnic group 4,410 1.2% 24,695 1.3% 1.3%


Confidence Interval

PopulationSex Ethnicity

Respondents

Female

Male

73

Base populations: gender and deprivation



1 (Most Deprived) 27,623 7.7% 165,267 8.5% 0.5%2 24,901 6.9% 150,039 7.7% 0.6%3 23,250 6.4% 131,319 6.8% 0.6%4 20,860 5.8% 114,517 5.9% 0.6%5 19,166 5.3% 102,104 5.3% 0.6%6 17,578 4.9% 90,882 4.7% 0.7%7 16,177 4.5% 82,244 4.2% 0.7%8 15,103 4.2% 77,348 4.0% 0.7%9 14,121 3.9% 72,784 3.8% 0.7%

10 (Least Deprived) 12,118 3.4% 61,879 3.2% 0.8%1 (Most Deprived) 23,660 6.6% 141,749 7.3% 0.6%

2 21,214 5.9% 122,808 6.3% 0.6%3 19,714 5.5% 108,042 5.6% 0.6%4 18,086 5.0% 95,683 4.9% 0.7%5 16,904 4.7% 86,520 4.5% 0.7%6 16,064 4.5% 78,438 4.0% 0.7%7 14,938 4.1% 71,573 3.7% 0.7%8 14,200 3.9% 67,932 3.5% 0.7%9 13,670 3.8% 64,038 3.3% 0.7%

10 (Least Deprived) 11,424 3.2% 54,446 2.8% 0.8%

Indices of Deprivation 2011Respondents Confidence

Interval

PopulationSex

Male

Female

74

Base populations: ethnicity and deprivation

Source: Learner Satisfaction 2011 to 2012, Individualised Learner Record 2011 to 2012 and Indices of Deprivation 2010

Number % of Total Number % of Total1 7,048 2.0% 44,616 2.3% 1.1%2 5,061 1.4% 32,029 1.7% 1.3%3 4,263 1.2% 24,440 1.3% 1.4%4 3,327 0.9% 17,240 0.9% 1.5%5 2,458 0.7% 13,258 0.7% 1.8%6 1,877 0.5% 9,696 0.5% 2.0%7 1,228 0.3% 6,709 0.3% 2.5%8 1,009 0.3% 5,440 0.3% 2.8%9 836 0.2% 4,669 0.2% 3.1%

10 688 0.2% 3,664 0.2% 3.4%1 5,744 1.6% 38,222 2.0% 1.2%2 4,725 1.3% 33,879 1.7% 1.3%3 3,391 0.9% 22,779 1.2% 1.6%4 2,082 0.6% 13,023 0.7% 2.0%5 1,347 0.4% 8,272 0.4% 2.4%6 869 0.2% 4,950 0.3% 3.0%7 489 0.1% 3,001 0.2% 4.1%8 392 0.1% 2,236 0.1% 4.5%9 289 0.1% 1,764 0.1% 5.3%

10 209 0.1% 1,237 0.1% 6.2%1 1,759 0.5% 11,199 0.6% 2.1%2 1,637 0.5% 10,240 0.5% 2.2%3 1,307 0.4% 7,926 0.4% 2.5%4 1,046 0.3% 5,941 0.3% 2.8%5 821 0.2% 4,592 0.2% 3.1%6 674 0.2% 3,551 0.2% 3.4%7 572 0.2% 2,750 0.1% 3.6%8 462 0.1% 2,378 0.1% 4.1%9 451 0.1% 2,181 0.1% 4.1%

10 394 0.1% 1,830 0.1% 4.4%1 2,013 0.6% 14,907 0.8% 2.0%2 1,772 0.5% 12,551 0.6% 2.2%3 1,537 0.4% 10,049 0.5% 2.3%4 1,196 0.3% 7,594 0.4% 2.6%5 996 0.3% 6,057 0.3% 2.8%6 802 0.2% 4,993 0.3% 3.2%7 631 0.2% 3,978 0.2% 3.6%8 523 0.1% 3,464 0.2% 3.9%9 485 0.1% 3,177 0.2% 4.1%

10 431 0.1% 2,754 0.1% 4.3%1 34,719 9.6% 198,072 10.2% 0.5%2 32,920 9.1% 184,148 9.5% 0.5%3 32,466 9.0% 174,167 9.0% 0.5%4 31,295 8.7% 166,402 8.6% 0.5%5 30,448 8.4% 156,445 8.1% 0.5%6 29,420 8.2% 146,130 7.5% 0.5%7 28,195 7.8% 137,379 7.1% 0.5%8 26,917 7.5% 131,762 6.8% 0.5%9 25,730 7.1% 125,031 6.4% 0.5%

10 21,820 6.0% 106,840 5.5% 0.6%

Confidence Interval

Indices of Deprivation 2011Respondents Population

Black / African / Caribbean / Black

British


Other ethnic group

White

Ethnicity


75

Base populations: Learner group (age/gender/level)



16-18 Female Entry Level 2,674 0.7% 10,180 0.5% 1.6%16-18 Female Level 1 9,526 2.6% 31,962 1.6% 0.8%16-18 Female Level 2 29,927 8.2% 107,230 5.5% 0.5%

16-18 Female Level 3+ 51,939 14.2% 174,056 9.0% 0.4%16-18 Male Entry Level 4,428 1.2% 16,145 0.8% 1.3%

16-18 Male Level 1 17,970 4.9% 60,851 3.1% 0.6%16-18 Male Level 2 34,802 9.5% 129,697 6.7% 0.4%16-18 Male Level 3+ 50,573 13.8% 166,100 8.6% 0.4%

19+ Female Entry Level 14,443 4.0% 119,093 6.1% 0.8%19+ Female Level 1 11,867 3.2% 93,136 4.8% 0.8%19+ Female Level 2 37,575 10.3% 296,548 15.3% 0.5%

19+ Female Level 3+ 35,464 9.7% 216,178 11.1% 0.5%19+ Male Entry Level 8,693 2.4% 70,442 3.6% 1.0%

19+ Male Level 1 6,625 1.8% 64,263 3.3% 1.1%19+ Male Level 2 26,383 7.2% 247,610 12.8% 0.6%19+ Male Level 3+ 22,625 6.2% 136,121 7.0% 0.6%

Age, Sex and Level of StudyRespondents Confidence

Interval

Population

learner satisfaction equality and diversity data report

Documents